Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19065136›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Genetics2009

Genotype-phenotype databases: challenges and solutions for the post-genomic era.

Gudmundur A Thorisson, Juha Muilu, Anthony J Brookes

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Genetics, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

39 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Single Nucleotide Polymorphism Genotyping in Single-Molecule Electronic Circuits.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2017
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Computational tools for comparative phenomics: the role and promise of ontologies.Mammalian genome : official journal of the International Mammalian Genome Society · 2012
    Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Gudmundur A ThorissonDepartment of Genetics, University of Leicester, University Road, Leicester LE1 7RH, UK.
Juha Muilu
Anthony J Brookes

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The flow of research data concerning the genetic basis of health and disease is rapidly increasing in speed and complexity. In response, many projects are seeking to ensure that there are appropriate informatics tools, systems and databases available to manage and exploit this flood of information. Previous solutions, such as central databases, journal-based publication and manually intensive data curation, are now being enhanced with new systems for federated databases, database publication, and more automated management of data flows and quality control. Along with emerging technologies that enhance connectivity and data retrieval, these advances should help to create a powerful knowledge environment for genotype-phenotype information.

Indexed as

Databases, GeneticGenotypePhenotypeAnimalsGenomicsHumansMutation

Identifiers

PMID19065136

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.